Topic: Your recommendation on best Large diaphragm microphone under $1000

[gusbud1]

I like the Rodes NT2 or NT2a's wondering what else is out there that would be considered a great value for the price.  All opinions welcome 

[stirinthesauce]

AT 4050's, hands down.  Smooooooooth, transparent, detailed and quiet.

[Shawn]

ADK TL's

x2

great versatile mic. well under $1k used. check the yard sale.

[rowjimmytour]

ADK TL's

x2

great versatile mic. well under $1k used. check the yard sale.

I 3/rd that and twatts is still in the YS:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,99865.0.html

[Javier Cinakowski]

I'll add another vote for the AT4050.   I'll also say that I have heard some great recordings from the ADK-TL's...

ADK is a USA company founded by musicians (manufactured in China.)  AT is all Japanese. 
Both very reputable....

[jeromejello]

the LSD2 has produced some nice stuff

[rowjimmytour]

I'll add another vote for the AT4050.   I'll also say that I have heard some great recordings from the ADK-TL's...

ADK is a USA company founded by musicians (manufactured in China.)  AT is all Japanese. 
Both very reputable....

One thing that brings ADK over the top is great customer service no matter what the problem is. I had my stand fall and both of my super shocks got damaged but the TL's came out w/o a scar and Larry sent me two new shocks free of charge. I have also got my share of free elastic bands for the shocks.
Peace

[BC]

Might also want to look at the Shure KSM 44

[bdasilva]

Terry (twatts) has a pair of TLs for sale on the yardsale.. I also have a matched pair I now find extra.. TLs, Regular mounts, Super Mounts, one T mount, Factory screens and case. For 600.00 and fees. Thay have been my go to mics for three years... I'm the 2nd owner.. bought it from Tony B...

[Javier Cinakowski]

the LSD2 has produced some nice stuff

Being that the LSD2 is a transformerless design and is made by the same manufacture (797audio) as the ADK TL, they might be more similar than I initially realized...

[sygdwm]

peluso p2

[bhadella]

ADK TL's

x2

great versatile mic. well under $1k used. check the yard sale.

I 3/rd that and twatts is still in the YS:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,99865.0.html

4th'd.

[DSatz]

gusbud1, I promise not to argue with you, but would simply like to know what you imagine you will gain with large-diaphragm microphones. They work best when the predominant sound energy reaches them on axis (e.g. close-miking of soloists) since they don't--and physically, can't possibly--have similar frequency response off-axis as on-axis.

In live concert taping at anywhere near normal distances, more of the sound reaches the microphones from off-axis than on-axis. Thus very few professional recording engineers would (or, in fact, do) make such a choice. Perhaps you are very well aware of all these things; I really am asking the question out of curiosity.

--best regards

[illconditioned]

gusbud1, I promise not to argue with you, but would simply like to know what you imagine you will gain with large-diaphragm microphones. They work best when the predominant sound energy reaches them on axis (e.g. close-miking of soloists) since they don't--and physically, can't possibly--have similar frequency response off-axis as on-axis.

In live concert taping at anywhere near normal distances, more of the sound reaches the microphones from off-axis than on-axis. Thus very few professional recording engineers would (or, in fact, do) make such a choice. Perhaps you are very well aware of all these things; I really am asking the question out of curiosity.

--best regards

Great question...

   Richard

[Javier Cinakowski]

Ineed a great question.  I find that DSatz's post is esspecially true for the card setting of a multi-pattern LDC.  I have had great results with Blumlien and omni at a distance.

I much prefer SDC cardioids at a distance.  The low frequencies of a card LDC act more like an omni.  The SDC retains much of its directionallity throughout the frequency range.  The LDC at a distance picks up too much reflections and reverberation for my tastes. 

On the other hand, I have found the LDC to perform very well at the stage lip and in very small venues, such as a bar.  The coloration is quite often a advantage when there is a subpar PA speaker within 15' of your mics.  Usually it sounds like crap in these venues and I usually don't want to capture it accuratly.  The LDC can create recordings that have a "wow" factor to them.  They might not sound acurate, but they are more pleasurable.  I also wouldn't hesitate to use a LDC outdoors, where off-axis and reflections are less of a problem...

There are many situations in concert recording, just as there are many types of microphones.  I think this hobby has a place for each type of microphone.  SDCs, LDC, Boundarys, electrets, dynamics, you name it!   The SDC might be the best for most situations, but there are times that a LDC with out-perform.  IMO

[gusbud1]

gusbud1, I promise not to argue with you, but would simply like to know what you imagine you will gain with large-diaphragm microphones. They work best when the predominant sound energy reaches them on axis (e.g. close-miking of soloists) since they don't--and physically, can't possibly--have similar frequency response off-axis as on-axis.

In live concert taping at anywhere near normal distances, more of the sound reaches the microphones from off-axis than on-axis. Thus very few professional recording engineers would (or, in fact, do) make such a choice. Perhaps you are very well aware of all these things; I really am asking the question out of curiosity.

--best regards

I primarily use the large-diaphragm in a 3 mic mix to bring a little warmth a little bass and a little openness to the mix.  I agree I am not going to get the same amount of detail taping from the SBD vs. miking something up close, but I have the earthworks to gather all the detail I need.  Plus, I was thinking it would be nice to have a pair of large diaphragm mics for the very reason you state, miking something up close if ever needed. 

[DSatz]

gusbud1, many thanks for your reply. I completely understand what you're saying, even though I would disagree about certain assumptions that you make. But the whole point of a hobby is to follow your own inclinations and see where they lead you. That's even a big part of stuff that isn't a hobby. More power to you, and may your cables always be just long enough.

--Javier, just to clarify, the things you've observed are more a function of single- vs. dual-diaphragm microphones than small vs. large. This is easy to confuse since most dual-diaphragm microphones are large (and most large condenser microphones are dual-diaphragm), while most single-diaphragm microphones are small (and most small condenser microphones are single-diaphragm). But there are a few exceptions which can let us see which factor is really making the difference.

In general, the pattern of a dual-diaphragm cardioid microphone typically spreads out at the lowest frequencies, becoming a wide cardioid--which is undoubtedly where the reputation of large microphones having "warmer" or "better" bass comes from. A larger diaphragm is no help in picking up longer sound wavelengths--though I gather some people think that it "naturally" or "obviously" should offer an advantage. (It doesn't, and there is no actual reason why it should.)

Getting back to reality, a single-diaphragm cardioid that is well designed can keep a real cardioid pattern down to 50 Hz or even below--and this characteristic isn't limited to small-diaphragm designs. In the attached picture file, the polar diagram on the left is for the low-frequency range of the Neumann TLM 103 (single-diaphragm cardioid), while on the right is the low-frequency range for the dual-diaphragm Neumann TLM 127 in its cardioid setting. As you can see, the TLM 127's pattern spreads out at the lowest frequencies in a way that the TLM 103's pattern hardly does at all.

These are both large-diaphragm microphones; in fact the design of the TLM 127's capsule was based on TLM 103's, and their overall dimensions are nearly identical, so this is a revealing comparison.

--best regards

[mmedley.]

In live concert taping at anywhere near normal distances, more of the sound reaches the microphones from off-axis than on-axis. Thus very few professional recording engineers would (or, in fact, do) make such a choice. Perhaps you are very well aware of all these things; I really am asking the question out of curiosity.

Pardon me for butting in, but what characteristics will a LD mic exhibit in higher vs. lower SPL environments at the same (not close) distance? Any noticeable differences? Just curious. Not planning on LD's, but was curious about your statements above vs. what I have listened to on recordings of rock shows with various mics such as Neumann u89's, usm69's, etc. Just coincidence?

[Jimna]

great thread, very interesting read.

[DSatz]

mmedley. asked:

> what characteristics will a LD mic exhibit in higher vs. lower SPL environments at the same (not close) distance? Any noticeable differences?

Are you asking what difference a large diaphragm makes at both extremes of the microphone's dynamic range? I'm not sure what your reference to recording distance means, since that's not really a factor in dynamic range (except in a boundary case where proximity effect might conceivably cause the electronics of a mike to overload).

--best regards

[Javier Cinakowski]

Thanks for the info about single vs double diaphram.  That makes sense... 

[DSatz]

mshilarious, I rather doubt that the whole difference in those two maximum SPL specifications is due to the difference in capsule size. For one thing, the larger Shure KSM microphones have what might be called mid-sized diaphragms (ca. 3/4" across) rather than what would normally be called "large" (ca. 1 inch diameter for the active area).

Do you know for a fact that their circuitry is absolutely identical? That would be a little unusual if so. But even then the real point is the capacitance of the capsules--which is proportional to area only when the spacing is the same--and again I'm not certain that we can assume identical spacing between the diaphragm and the backplate in two rather different capsule designs. The KSM 141 in particular has Shure's mechanically switchable two-pattern capsule--a rather unique invention if you discount the fact that Schoeps has been producing such capsules since the 1950s under their own patent ...

--best regards

[beanstalk]

busman has some LD's coming... I'm sure they'll be very affordable.